There is a considerable amount of vitriol directed against the Conservative MP Nadine Dorries, in particular from Labour party members. Ironically, many of the people who attack her for her views on subjects such as abortion and disabilities use similarly offensive words to describe her: "loopy", "nutty", "insane" – all of which are terms which should long have been consigned to the same realm as words describing other minorities in a derogatory manner. These are not the kind of expressions which should be used by the self-defining "progressive left".

It's fair to say that Dorries is partially attacked for her strong opinions, which are certainly a breeding ground for extremely fierce debates. Feminists find her remarks on abortion reprehensible, some bloggers find her to be an enemy of science, and plenty of women (and men) criticise her opposition of all-women shortlists for selecting MPs.

However, other Conservative MPs who express these same views are not always faced with such vehement anger. Ann Widdecombe regularly came in for her fair share of opposition, but hasn't got the same hate status within the Labour party, despite holding similar views on abortion. The worst she is likely to face at the moment is ridicule – for her dancing. Both these women are held far more to account for these views than many male MPs: David Amess, Tory MP for Southend West, is not only firmly anti-abortion, but supports the return of capital punishment. Where is the Twitter outrage among the progressives? And the list could go on.

Dorries has also been criticised for her admission that her blog was "70% fiction and 30% fact". I agree that when an MP writes for her constituents, they need to give an accurate impression of their activities. But how many bloggers, of any variety, recount every event exactly as it happened, with no tweaking? I'd say very few. A more incisive question would be to ask how many admit to changing events; not necessarily in order to deceive, but to make things flow more easily and conform to a narrative. Once again, very few. It's my belief that Dorries should be commended for admitting openly what so many bloggers push under the carpet: all accounts of events are bound to be fictionalised to some extent. Dorries is at least warning her readers to take her posts with a pinch of salt. And if she is to be hounded for it, I believe that every MP's blog should face similar scrutiny. Dorries makes herself very visible online. I'd regard this as a positive thing: she makes no secret about her opinions and policies. Arguably, she even increases her accountability this way.

In many ways, the left's treatment of Nadine Dorries reminds me of the right's treatment of Sally Bercow. They are both outspoken women in the public eye who make no attempt to conceal what they think. Their tweets have a similar feel to them – Dorries's tweets feel quite refreshing for an MP – and yet they are both savagely criticised in a way that their male counterparts rarely are. I'd urge the left to think before they lay into her – and remember that misogyny isn't the preserve of the rightwing press.